What did they do to dead cells?

My comfort food is charcoal

A lot of people are really good at justifying the problems by completely missing the point as well. i.e people going “Oh you can just disable/hide/remove xyz” when the issue is that xyz shouldn’t be there at all or be opt in, rather than opt out.

Then there’s the people that listen to these justifications without a second thought or even parroting them, giving them extra legitimacy to other people that come across these takes.

Probably like 10 or something

Ron*

It doesn’t take that much to go and find out about games like AC:Unity and Arkham Knight that predate NMS. In fact I’m pretty sure Ubisoft and EA are the two companies most notorious for “Release broken fix later” to give you a head start on looking into things.

Discourse surrounding broken game launches/Release Broken Fix Later has been around a bit longer than NMS.

Cyberpunk 2077 was a really ambitious game, with a lot of new mechanics and incredible graphics. Beasts like that are really difficult to optimize for a large range of computers with different specs, so at first it ran poorly on some.

What about all the other “Ambitious games” that we’ve had over the years that come out just fine? A game being ambitious does not excuse a company releasing the game in what is blatantly an unfinished state. This isn’t the case of a game having a few performance hiccups here and there but rather egregious bugs and severe performance issues across the board. This is stuff that is all over youtube, reddit, twitter and so on. It’s pretty well documented how bad the game was.

The most notably buggy release was the PS4 one. And rightfully so. They were trying to run a truly next gen game on a console which was more than a decade old. They not only had to optimize the game, but they basically made a completely different game, with different assets and engines, which was really difficult to do. Still, it was too much for the console, especially old PS4s that were full of dust or had old fans and were overheating.

Again, this really isn’t an excuse. They had the power the can the next gen versions of the game if it was so difficult to pull off. They also had the power to delay the game in order to make sure that it was ready for launch. They could have done so many things such that the last gen versions of the day would either never see the light of day or be ready for launch. CDPR are a big enough studio to pull something like this off. They’re not a small indie studio.

Another important fact is that users were also pressuring CDPR into releasing Cyberpunk 2077. It was delayed at least once (maybe twice, I don’t remember), and people wanted to play the game. They probably had to choose between delaying it another time or releasing it without polishing it that much.

Yes, there may have been pressure. But no, the consumer base does not have anywhere near enough power over corporations like you’re trying to imply. Games aren’t just released early because “Oh no the consumers are getting angy”. Though once again this was their fault due to them giving the consumer a completely unrealistic initial release date that they obviously could not hit, considering the absolute state of the game at launch.

The most likely explanation is that they were simply trying to get the game out as soon as possible to cash in and they absolutely did not want to miss a major sales period such as Christmas. They were simply trying to drop a minimal viable product with plans to fix it later. Turns out they dropped a less than minimally viable product in their rush to make some dosh. Knowingly too if you look into the allegations that I’ll link later.

I believe it was Cyberpunk 2077 that started the trend of “release now fix later” games.

No. “Release broken fix later” has been a thing for maybe the last decade. Do people not remember shitshows like AC:Unity? Cyberpunk is most definitely not the first game to be “Release broken, fix later”.

However, I don’t think they really did it on purpose.

I don’t think it was dropped broken on purpose. But I do think it was an attempt to drop the usual bare minimum product. Just so happens that they miscalculated and dropped something less than minimal. It’s still gross incompetence and shows the consumer they’re more than willing to drop something bare minimum with the promise of fixing it later. Rather than dropping a complete game.

The game was too ambitious for its own good, and having to develop, optimize and test two basically different versions of it was too big of a task for a studio that in today’s terms wasn’t even that big.

Again, not an excuse. They’re a massive studio, big enough to have people that know how to plan a project like this, people that understand their limitations and what is or isn’t achievable. It’s standard project planning practice.

But even then there are allegations that people in the company were aware that the game was not ready to launch.

https://www.gamesradar.com/new-report-suggests-cdpr-staff-knew-cyberpunk-2077-wasnt-ready-for-release/

And yet they still dropped the game.

There is no excuse for the launch of CP2077.

The rest of the AAA producers just realized that CDPR still won loads of money at launch, and decided to release incomplete games on purpose, after seeing that CDPR could make profits that way.

The industry learned this about a decade ago. We’ve been plagued by half baked launched for so long at this point that you don’t have to go far to find out about it.

But must importantly, CDPR did an amazing job at fixing the game, unlike many other studios releasing broken AAAs.

In this case I think it’s less fixing the game and more finishing the development of the game, all things considered. The thing they should have done before releasing the game as if it was a finished product when, in fact, it clearly wasn’t.

There’s fixing a game and there’s what CDPR had to do to CP2077.

Yes, a lot of companies don’t fix their games. But at the same time most of these companies don’t release their games in such a state that they start getting into legal trouble over the launch of their game.

https://arstechnica.com/gaming/2023/01/investors-settle-cyberpunk-2077-lawsuit-with-developer-for-1-85-million/

https://www.nme.com/news/cyberpunk-2077-investigated-polish-consumer-protection-agency-2855205

Cyberpunk was such a massive disaster that they didn’t really have much choice other than to finish working on their game. To repair the massive hit to their PR as well as other issues such as the class action and the whole debacle with Sony kicking the game of the PS Store.

Even though it took a while, they still delivered the game they promised to their buyers.

Yes, it’s good that they stuck with the game and did more than the bare minimum to bring it to a better state. But it’s not exactly something to praise them over. It took them ~2 years to bring the game to a state that it should have been in at launch. Instead of launching the game in a finished state, they knowingly dropped the game in an unfinished state. They also put out a review embargo preventing reviewers from informing the consumer about said issues, they actively worked to mislead the consumer about the state of their game.

What CDPR did is absolutely not excusable under any circumstances.

Their next projects should absolutely be scrutinised until they prove that they have learned from their mistakes.

I wouldn’t trust CDPR so easily yet after how diabolical the launch of CP2077 was.

deleted by creator

Making excuses is defending the situation.

“Oh you can ignore it and other programs use more resources” is an excuse for the situation. It also missing the fact that games typically have good reason to be taking up so much resources. Bloatware launchers don’t.

Most people when they have an issue don’t go making excuses unless they’re ignorant or too lazy to want a change. Why else would anyone downplay an issue that theyd be better off without?

Yes, you can make anything look small in comparison to games. It’s a bit disingenuous to compare a launcher to something designed to use a lot of resources such as a game. You can’t really compare games and launchers, they’re completely different kinds of software.

A game has business using all the resources they do. Any launcher that is installed on top of a game that you bought from another storefront doesn’t.

Again, just as users shouldn’t have to put up with bloated games that take up unnecessary resources, they shouldn’t have to deal with unnecessary launchers that take up unnecessary resources.

It doesn’t matter that games are larger because that doesn’t change the point. Point is that these extra launchers just don’t need to be a thing. Whether or not games are larger in comparison is completely irrelevant.

It’s bloatware because they aren’t needed. Thats what bloatware is, unnecessary shit that takes up space and resources when it doesn’t need to. If I bought a game in steam, it should just require Steam to run. Not Origin or Uplay or other bloat on top.

It’s unnecessary no matter the scale. Why should I ignore something taking up 500mb when I can achieve the same thing for 250mb or less? In the end it’s always better to have a leaner system that doesn’t have shit you don’t need taking up any amount of space.

The way you downplay it sounds a lot like you’re trying to make it out as if it’s not an issue.

Games taking up resources doesn’t change anything I said either. Funnily enough though the same thing applies to games, users shouldn’t have to put up with games that take up unnecessary resources either. Just like they shouldn’t have to deal with bloatware launchers that take up unnecessary resources and throw more hoops to jump through.

Not really sure why you’re defending something that’s worse for you. What’s in it for you that you’d rather defend unnecessary launchers over not having to deal with them?

It’s not just one launcher in a lot of cases. Many cases have you also run another launcher such as Ubisoft and EA games that require their launchers to run along side Steam. It all adds up and it doesn’t need to be that way nor does it need defending.

I don’t really understand why you’re defending something thats worse for you than the alternative.

It doesn’t stop being an issue just because you can brush it under the rug and ignore it.

The point is that the user shouldn’t have to work around these extra launchers. How about companies just stop pushing their own bloatware. If you buy a game through Steam, it should just require Steam. Same for GOG and all the others.

And those extra launchers take up unnecessary resources and extra steps between you and the game.

If I buy a game on one launcher, I should only have to deal with that launcher.

There’s thousands of great games out there. I think I can live with missing the odd one here and there.

Could be fucking anything

Like a naked woman.

Probably the way they used to do things, provide the server hosting tools to the community.

Think like TF2 and CS:S.

There’s plenty (But not all) MP games that can do that.

Nice cop out.

I’m pretty sure Americans have a panic attack when what they’re eating isn’t at least 50% high fructose corn syrup.